Why Is G.I. JOE Having So Many Problems?

[Fred Broca]

I originally posted this on The Tank, but I decided to post it hear to get an opposing opinion. Personally, I think The Tankers do to much "stanning," for Hasbro and you guys have a more realisitic prespective of things.

http://www.hisstank.com/forum/g-i-j...ms-question-why-there-so-many-problems-m.html

Question, why are there so many problems with making a movie about a special operations team that stops a terrorist group from tearing shit up?

Seriously, all you need to do is come up with a plot that would work for any military action flick. Make the leader of U.S. Special Ops team Hawk. Have his field commander named Duke or Stalker. Have a ninja dude named Snake Eyes in it. If you must have a love triangle with Duke, S.E. and Scarlett. Call this unit G.I. JOE. Fill out the rest of the roster with some of the hundreds of JOEs that are available.

For the Enemy have a mysterious dude with an axe to grind and wears a mask and or battle helmet. The mysterious dude gets his weapons from another mysterious dude of Scottish origins. The head of the mysterious dude intelligence is a femme fatale of maybe European aristocracy. Throw in a sabotuer that's extraordinarily nice with explosives, a mercenary from Australia, maybe a set of twins who supplies the mysterious dude with money for plans at world demonination and the Twins have the best of terrorist group stategically placed in military, banking, and governmental institutions around the world. Call this enemy COBRA.

Hasbro and Paramount seem to be creating a bunch of needless problems for themsleves for a movie that should be relatively easy to make.

 

[bigdaddyblue73]

The problems arise because Hasbro is letting the movie studio try to make GI Joe something it isn't and "modern" it up. They keep trying to add things that need not be added.

 

[Monkeywrench]

I often wonder the same thing. Hasbro has wasted so much opportunity. I reference this all the time, but all you have to do is look at the video game community. The #1 selling genre is Modern Military War Games. It's been like this for 6+ years now.

Were talking mega millions here. These are popular with everyone from the ages 8-40. You look at the story lines for games like COD, Battlefield, MoH, Homefront etc. It's no different than a Joe vs Cobra story.

The Joe Brand has completely wasted the "patriotic boom" since 911. They could have had another golden age if they weren't so incompetent and afraid. I'm not just talking Movies here either. They could/should have had a running TV series(both live action and cartoon), video games, several toy lines and cross merchandising.

Instead we get hiatus after hiatus.

 

[pcsguy88]

Hasbro and Paramount screwed the pooch when they didn't make the spec ops in Transformers the GI Joe team. They had a good cast chemistry going and many fans of that movie would have paid to see a spin off.

 

[PFunk]

I often wonder the same thing. Hasbro has wasted so much opportunity. I reference this all the time, but all you have to do is look at the video game community. The #1 selling genre is Modern Military War Games. It's been like this for 6+ years now.

Were talking mega millions here. These are popular with everyone from the ages 8-40. You look at the story lines for games like COD, Battlefield, MoH, Homefront etc. It's no different than a Joe vs Cobra story.

The Joe Brand has completely wasted the "patriotic boom" since 911. They could have had another golden age if they weren't so incompetent and afraid. I'm not just talking Movies here either. They could/should have had a running TV series(both live action and cartoon), video games, several toy lines and cross merchandising.

Instead we get hiatus after hiatus.

Totally agree with this post. If Hasbro had the fortitude to do it, they could have made GI Joe the hero of young American children like he was in the 60s, back when we weren't afraid to be who we were. Too bad comic book authors are too afraid to write the story of GI Joe fighting our nation's enemies, but have no fear of making Green Lantern gay.

But that would have involved Hasbro having to fight the forces of political correctness. No one's that brave.

 

[Monkeywrench]

Totally agree with this post. If Hasbro had the fortitude to do it, they could have made GI Joe the hero of young American children like he was in the 60s, back when we weren't afraid to be who we were. Too bad comic book authors are too afraid to write the story of GI Joe fighting our nation's enemies, but have no fear of making Green Lantern gay.

But that would have involved Hasbro having to fight the forces of political correctness. No one's that brave.

Exactly!

I'm so sick of everybody trying to be politically correct. In the 40's in was okay for Captain America to kick Hitler's ass. In the 60's it was okay for G.I.Joe to want to go to war with Communism. In the 80's it was okay for G.I.Joe to fight terrorism and have a cold war with Russia.

Now all of sudden, Joe is too violent, and can't promote war for fear of the children! Really motherfuckers?!? We as a country have been at war for the last 10+ years. Better get back to playing with faggy lightsabers and killing androids.

 

[Falcone]

The problem with GI Joe is that Hasbro is just too big. There are too many people with their hand in things which creates indecision and conflict. The toy line is trying to produce figures from multiple continuities. And there's been several cartoon series, movies and comic book that are unrelated to each other. Not to mention Hasbro answers to it's share holders which creates even more problems. Hasbro needs to find someone who knows the GI Joe brand and put them in charge of it. That person should have all final say, that way GI Joe sticks to one story line across all media and toys. Either that or Hasbro should sell or lease the GI Joe brand to a smaller company that can better take care of it.

 

[Charade]

I'm really can't agree with your assessment. You should read "Toy Wars" (which I'm just finishing up); it goes into extreme details about how Hasbro is set up, which particular emphasis on G.I. Joe. In summary, although Hasbro is very big, it is also very compartmentalized, with each department acting relatively independently. And there is one guy in charge of G.I. Joe. Having one guy in charge who "knows" the brand (Kirk Bozigian) is how we ended up getting Sgt. Savage.

As for the unrelated continuities...I'm not sure that's a bad thing. How many different versions of Batman are there? Comics, TV shows (animated and live action), movies (Burton and Nolan)? That does nothing but reinforce Batman's coolness into the mass conscience. All you need is to enjoy at least one version to enjoy the idea of Batman. G.I. Joe should the the same...whether you like the noir feel of IDW's Cobra, or the nostalgia of Hama's ARAH, or the A-Team-esque, kid-friendly Renegades, or the darker Resolute...by using different media, Hasbro's casting a wider net. Hasbro should be working more to expand these different universes (and expand into other media like video games), not consolidate them.

 

[Falcone]

Those Batman examples are spanning many years. I'm talking about Joe have multiple continuities within the same year or two. And the continuities are so different from one another that liking one does not mean you will like the others. I think there needs to be a consistency and familiarity to be more successful. Batman doesn't have a toy line as it's focal point like GI Joe.

I cut out most of what I was going to say, as I couldn't find a clear way to state it.

Edit: I forgot to comment on your first paragraph. How much say does the guy in charge of GI Joe ultimately have though? Does he have final say on every figure that comes out, and the designs of those figures? Is he just in charge of the toys or the whole brand? Since Hasbro made a deal with Paramount was he forced to release ROC toys with no input? Sorry for the string of questions, I just don't see this one guy having ultimate control of the property which is what I suggest.

 

[Charade]

Then if you don't like the Batman example, consider Joe's "sister line" Transformers, which also has multiple media with different continuities within a short period of time. Transformers does very well for itself. Again, the different stories with different continuities are not hurting the brand...they increase the appeal. Kids see what they like, and then start wanting the toys to match. Kids aren't getting a chance to see G.I. Joe, especially with so much competition.

And as for your series of questions: are you asking for an absolute dictatorship for creative leadership? Again, I'm not sure how that would help. And again, I point to the Sgt Savage example...that was Bozigian's baby from inception to design (including the different scale). Personally, I don't see how not getting multiple inputs in the design process can't be a great thing: that's how innovations get done.

You can argue that Hasbro's relationship with Paramount sucks, and that Paramount's dicking around with the movie schedule has forced Hasbro to produce some pretty crappy movie figures. And I would agree. But that's more to do with Hasbro the Company not standing up to Paramount the Company and being a little more protective and assertive over their licensed property. But within that (small) sub-division of Boys Toys within Hasbro (which frankly many other toy company would have probably have killed several times over by now), I think they are doing pretty well for themselves. IMO, creatively speaking, Hasbro was hitting it out of the park with PoC and 30th Anny, with many more hits than misses.

As I said in the other thread, it's the lack on distribution until recently (no KMarts, and only half of the Walmart's carrying Joes?) that's been hurting Joe. And it's the lack of commitment to media tie-ins:in the '80s, we had both a very successful Marvel comic (advertised on TV) and a syndicated TV show that 80% of boys watched. Neither had anything to do with each other, but both were important for bringing fans into the franchise.

 

[pcsguy88]

POC was amazing while it lasted. Great way to end my collecting of Joes until another round of modern soldiers turns up.

 

[K-Tiger]

PoC was great, very few real duds (suprise, suprise, they were all "core characters").

 

[fogger1138]

Totally agree with this post. If Hasbro had the fortitude to do it, they could have made GI Joe the hero of young American children like he was in the 60s, back when we weren't afraid to be who we were. Too bad comic book authors are too afraid to write the story of GI Joe fighting our nation's enemies, but have no fear of making Green Lantern gay.

But that would have involved Hasbro having to fight the forces of political correctness. No one's that brave.

Now all of sudden, Joe is too violent, and can't promote war for fear of the children! Really motherfuckers?!? We as a country have been at war for the last 10+ years. Better get back to playing with faggy lightsabers and killing androids.

I see this one a lot, bashing on Hasbro for somehow downplaying the military side of the brand becase "war is violent" and "we can't promote war". Who is actually saying that, though? Is it just an assumption based on the fact that GI JOE (a fictional unit) doesn't have any non-fictional enemies? Or is it a reaction to the way media seems to react to stuff? Are we just assuming that Hasbro is playing it safe?

I'm just curious, no judgements being made here.

 

[fogger1138]

The problem with GI Joe is that Hasbro is just too big. There are too many people with their hand in things which creates indecision and conflict.

I'm really can't agree with your assessment. You should read "Toy Wars" (which I'm just finishing up); it goes into extreme details about how Hasbro is set up, which particular emphasis on G.I. Joe. In summary, although Hasbro is very big, it is also very compartmentalized, with each department acting relatively independently. And there is one guy in charge of G.I. Joe. Having one guy in charge who "knows" the brand (Kirk Bozigian) is how we ended up getting Sgt. Savage.

Do we know if that's still the case?

I know I've read several times, mostly in con reports, that the "developers" or "design team" were pushing a particular character or idea and it was squashed from somewhere on high, which leads me to believe that maybe they changed the way they're doing things now.

 

[G.I.*EDDIE]

Hasbro and Paramount screwed the pooch when they didn't make the spec ops in Transformers the GI Joe team. They had a good cast chemistry going and many fans of that movie would have paid to see a spin off.

so true...a crossover woulda been a perfect opportunity to introduce GIJOE to masses of children...

 

[ThunderDan19]

POC was amazing while it lasted. Great way to end my collecting of Joes until another round of modern soldiers turns up.

^^^This.^^^

Had Joe continued this or even expanded it, I'd still be collecting.

 

[pcsguy88]

so true...a crossover woulda been a perfect opportunity to introduce GIJOE to masses of children...

The scenes with just them, up until they come stateside were perfect. Why they wouldn't pimp Joe instead of creating Sector 7 (or whatever they called themselves in 2 & 3) is beyond me.

 

[G.I.*EDDIE]

Such a golden (super cool) opportunity...especially if it had been kept secret until the film(s) started showing...It also woulda been cool to explain some future tech that maybe cobra could be using in a Joe movie...

 

[Falcone]

we had both a very successful Marvel comic (advertised on TV) and a syndicated TV show that 80% of boys watched. Neither had anything to do with each other, but both were important for bringing fans into the franchise.

That's sort of my point though. The two may have been unrelated to each other, but all the designs and settings were basically the same. It didn't matter if you only followed one of them. You could go to the store and find that same character in the same uniform. If a kid only liked Renegades and they go to the store and see Duke in a different uniform they may not care about it and just skip the toys altogether. And GI Joe lives on the toy line, unlike most other properties.

The point I was trying to make with my series of questions was to comment on how many hands are in the GI Joe pot. Bringing up Paramount was only an example to show that there are plenty of elements in the brand as a whole that are not controlled by the same person or group of people. And that creates conflict and inconsistencies.

Sgt Savage was a concept I liked. I liked the setting, the characters, and the designs. The only problem was the different scale of toys. I still like the idea of one person being in complete control, or maybe even a small group of people who vote on everything. The only thing that they shouldn't have a say in is the scale of the toys. And when I say complete control, I mean of the entire brand, that includes movie deals, comics, cartoons, all character and toy designs, all story lines, all merchandising, everything.

We have different opinions on what the problem with GI Joe is, and how to fix it. And that's fine.

 

[Fred Broca]

I often wonder the same thing. Hasbro has wasted so much opportunity. I reference this all the time, but all you have to do is look at the video game community. The #1 selling genre is Modern Military War Games. It's been like this for 6+ years now.

Were talking mega millions here. These are popular with everyone from the ages 8-40. You look at the story lines for games like COD, Battlefield, MoH, Homefront etc. It's no different than a Joe vs Cobra story.

That's a damn good question. Why has there been a JOE first person shooter or something along the lines of Arkham?

 

[Charade]

That's sort of my point though. The two may have been unrelated to each other, but all the designs and settings were basically the same. It didn't matter if you only followed one of them. You could go to the store and find that same character in the same uniform. If a kid only liked Renegades and they go to the store and see Duke in a different uniform they may not care about it and just skip the toys altogether. And GI Joe lives on the toy line, unlike most other properties.

The point I was trying to make with my series of questions was to comment on how many hands are in the GI Joe pot. Bringing up Paramount was only an example to show that there are plenty of elements in the brand as a whole that are not controlled by the same person or group of people. And that creates conflict and inconsistencies.

Sgt Savage was a concept I liked. I liked the setting, the characters, and the designs. The only problem was the different scale of toys. I still like the idea of one person being in complete control, or maybe even a small group of people who vote on everything. The only thing that they shouldn't have a say in is the scale of the toys. And when I say complete control, I mean of the entire brand, that includes movie deals, comics, cartoons, all character and toy designs, all story lines, all merchandising, everything.

We have different opinions on what the problem with GI Joe is, and how to fix it. And that's fine.

That may have been your point, but that is not what you said. And the designs of the characters between the different media is not so different that I can imagine a kid looking for a Renegades Duke being frustrated at only finding a PoC Duke and so giving up on the whole brand. Having multiple stories filling different niches can only help the brand.

The problem is that Hasbro needs to commit and match the toy release with the media release, not limit themselves to only one story, as you suggested.

And having one guy in charge: again, I'm arguing that Hasbro does that pretty much already. The head of GI Joe reports to the division head of Boys Toys, who reports to the President and CEO (who reports to the board). In a corporate setting, you can't get much more independent than that. True, Paramount is fracking things up because they control the movie release and have more control over character designs, but until Hasbro pulls a Marvel and starts producing their own movies, that situation won't change: Hasbro has leased the rights to GI Joe to Paramount and in doing so, cede some control to them as well.

You are arguing for a corporate structuring that, besides this temporary blip that is the movie, is pretty much is already present, which is the point of my original response.

 

[pcsguy88]

Such a golden (super cool) opportunity...especially if it had been kept secret until the film(s) started showing...It also woulda been cool to explain some future tech that maybe cobra could be using in a Joe movie...

No shit... Cobra could have snatched a piece of Megs off the ocean floor before TF2 started. That would have made humans in TF and space age shit in Joe acceptable to most fans. The movies could have converged again down the road ala Avengers.

 

[snakeling]

Were talking mega millions here. These are popular with everyone from the ages 8-40. You look at the story lines for games like COD, Battlefield, MoH, Homefront etc. It's no different than a Joe vs Cobra story.

The Joe Brand has completely wasted the "patriotic boom" since 911. They could have had another golden age if they weren't so incompetent and afraid. I'm not just talking Movies here either. They could/should have had a running TV series(both live action and cartoon), video games, several toy lines and cross merchandising.

Instead we get hiatus after hiatus.

Fuckin A right MW. It is possible.